Comparison and contrast of two efforts by the U.S. military to transform essay

This paper discusses the effectiveness of two major efforts made by the US military to transform, providing the appropriate facts to compare and contrast these efforts. Military operations during the World War II and the increased terrorist activity of the 2000s have clearly demonstrated the vital need for transformation of the US Army. Actually, the transformation of the US army stands for the strategic reorientation of the army. Moreover, this process leads to the significant changes in the country’s defense system, having a strong impact on the nation in general. This paper analyzes the nature and the importance of transformations and their implementation.

Introduction

The US Army transformation is a significant process that affects security of the country and the nation. In case the army fails to protect its country through the fullest implementation of the defense system, the army needs transformation. The Department of Defense defines the term transformation as “a process that shapes the changing nature of military competition and cooperation through new combinations of concepts, capabilities, people, and organizations that exploit our nation’s advantages and protect against our asymmetric vulnerabilities to sustain our strategic position, which helps underpin peace and stability in the world” (Military Transformation, 2011, p. 2). The practical implementation of the process of army transformation has been carried out several times beginning from 1947 (Mandeles, 2007). In the United States, the US military made several major efforts to transform the army. One of these efforts refers the transformation of the army after the World War II, when many countries were devastated by the war and implemented transformation of their defense systems. The second major effort to transform the US Army refers to the tragic events of September 11, 2011, when many innocent people were killed as a result of terrorist attack. Undoubtedly, both efforts made by the US military played a significant role in the development of the country and in the national security.

Analysis of the key factors that led to the perceived need to transform

There are several key factors that led to the perceived need to transform the US military. Both efforts made by the US military to transform are focused on providing national security and on coordination of the military functioning. However, there are certain differences between these efforts in terms of structural changes and innovation changes. In the first case, after the WWII, the US Congress established a plan to coordinate the actions of the US Army. This plan involved U.S. Army, Navy and U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. On December 19, 1945, the US President Harry Truman informed the US Congress of the necessity to create a unified Department of Homeland Security. However, the US Congress was concerned about the proposed concentration of command of several types of troops by one ministry. In February 1947, Harry Truman sent a bill aimed at the establishment and adoption of the Ministry of Defense. The major goal of the Ministry was to reduce the competition between the various military departments formed after the WWII. The Ministry is comprised of the departments of infantry, naval, air and amphibious forces, and includes non-military agencies, such as the National Security Agency and Military Intelligence Agency.

In the second case, the US military transformation was made after the events of September 11, 2001 aimed at fighting the spread of terrorism. This effort improved the US Army, making it more mobile and effective. According to the research, military transformation allowed the US Armed Forces to “achieve broad and sustained competitive advantage in the 21st century” (Military Transformation, 2011, p. 4). The second effort to transform the US army involves the activities that can help to develop new concepts and processes to produce new effective sources of military power. In this case, military transformation has increased the US Army’s strategic and operational responsiveness.

The key policies enacted to effect the desired transformation

The key policies enacted to effect the desired transformation include various methods that have to be implemented urgently to guarantee safety. The two efforts made by the US military to transform involve different policies. National Security Act of 1947 was adopted by the US President to ensure that the desired transformation of the US Army would positively affect the nation. This policy established military reorganization and provided coordination for the national security policy (Mandeles, 2007). The effort to transform army after the 9/11 terrorist attack required implementation of specific policies, including modernization of the army, implementation of modular conversion, rebalancing of the military forces across the active and reserve components, and the use of the “force generation model that provides for continuous operations” (Military Transformation, 2011).

Leading forces that shaped policies pursued in order to achieve the transformation

Some of the leading forces that shaped policies pursued in order to achieve the transformation include education approach. According to Schleifer, (2005), “unlike World War II and Desert Storm, there is no longer an opportunity to reorganize after the war is over” (p. 2). Therefore, the two efforts made by the US military to transform are different in terms of the selection of leading forces. The key leading forces applied to the army transformation after the tragic events of 2001 involve transformation of culture through “leadership and adaptive institutions” to change the behavior and the thinking of soldiers, transformation of the major processes and transformation of capabilities, reorganizing the force into “modular” units (Schleifer, 2005, p.5).

An assessment as to how well the military organization under investigation achieved its desired end state

The military organization under investigation has achieved its desired end state. The Department of Defense, headquartered at the Pentagon, provides the US military forces to deter war actions and protect the security of the country and the nation. Besides, the organization provides the appropriate information about various defense policies, functioning of other military organizations and operations. Today the Department is headed by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel. Over 1.4 million Americans are on active duty, and over 718,000 civilians serve as civilian personnel. Over 1.1 million Americans serve in the National Guard and Reserve forces, and over “2 million military retirees and their family members receive social benefits” (US Department of Defense, Official Website, 2013).

Changing business practice will improve efficiency in the military

Military transformation involves changing business practice to improve efficiency in the military. In both efforts made by the US military to transform, due attention was paid to adaptation of the military to a new security environment. However, the effort made by the military after the events of 9/11 aimed at overhead cost reduction and streamlining the military. New information technology was integrated to restrict the armed forces and “increase effectiveness, efficiency, flexibility” (“9/11 and the meaning of military transformation”, 2002). America’s military after the WWII was aimed at fighting big, infrequent wars against nation-state foes fielding very large, capital-intensive armed forces” (“9/11 and the meaning of military transformation”, 2002, p. 192). After the 9/11 tragedy, the US military must have the capacity to deal with “frequent, multiple and varied smaller-scale contingencies” (“9/11 and the meaning of military transformation”, 2002, p. 192). Therefore, business practice should be changed to improve efficiency in the military.

Adaptation of Military Strategy to the transformation of the military’s equipment and technology capabilities, in order to defeat all current and future enemies

In both efforts made by the US military to transform, special attention was paid to the adaptation of Military Strategy to the transformation of the military’s equipment and technology capabilities, in order to defeat all current and future enemies. However, in the second effort, discussed in this paper, the US military has developed a special plan based on the new innovation in the technological process. To defeat terrorists, it is necessary to implement innovation in the functioning of the military services. The key aspects in the security environment involve a more complex and distributed battle space, technology access, a wider range of adversaries. Thus, the major principles followed by the US military after the tragic events of 2001 include “integration, decisiveness and agility” (The National Military Strategy of the United States, 2004). Besides, the national military objectives include providing protection of the USA, preventing any conflicts and surprised terrorist attacks and prevailing against adversaries (The National Military Strategy of the United States, 2004).

Insuring National Security while transforming and fighting wars

In both efforts implemented by the US military to transform, national security was the key goal. However, it is obvious that the effort made by the US military to transform after the tragic events of 2001 has been more aimed at national security than the effort made by the US Army after the World War II. According to the research, “after WWII two more “live fire” wars were fought in Korea and Vietnam” (Vlahos, 2003, p. 2). This fact means that the nation participated in wars, playing partial leadership role, transforming its military by the system management, which resulted in the “creation of a professional military without precedent in the American experience” (Vlahos, 2003, p. 2). The new professional military, the “Volunteer Force” was specially designed to fight all of America’s “wars”. In the second case, transformation in the defense system promised a new “American way of war”, and the national mission was dramatically accelerated after the events of 2001 (Vlahos, 2003, p. 2).

Conclusion

Thus, it is necessary to conclude that the American soldiers should apply different approaches to be prepared for the challenges that lie ahead. Transformation requires solving a variety of issues. In addition, transformation is of great importance in today’s world to combat terrorism spread. The two efforts made by the US military to transform differ from one another, but they pursue one common goal to protect the country and the nations and establish peace in the whole world.